ERIC ED413420: Not a One-Way Street. The Power of Reciprocity in Family Literacy Programs.

60 Pages·1997·1.4 MB·English

by  ERIC

DOCUMENT RESUME
CE 074 929
ED 413 420
Griswold, Karen; Ullman, Claudia M.
AUTHOR
Not a One-Way Street. The Power of Reciprocity in Family
TITLE
Literacy Programs.
City Univ. of New York, Bronx. Herbert H. Lehman Coll. Inst.
INSTITUTION
for Literacy Studies.
1997-00-00
PUB DATE
NOTE
58p.
Reports - Research (143)
PUB TYPE
MF01/PC03 Plus Postage.
EDRS PRICE
Adult Basic Education; *Adult Literacy; Case Studies;
DESCRIPTORS
*Family Literacy; *Literacy Education; Outcomes of
Education; *Parent Education; Partnerships in Education;
Preschool Education; Program Effectiveness; Program
Implementation; Staff Development
City University of New York; New York City Board of
IDENTIFIERS
Education
ABSTRACT
The FLITE (Family Literacy Involvement Through Education)
program is a partnership between a public school in the Bronx, New York, and
the City University of New York that brings together two federal funding
streams (FAMILY FIRST: Family-School Partnership Program and Even Start) to
provide adult literacy, parenting education, and early childhood education in
a family literacy context. The program features home visits, parenting
workshops, staff development to continue educational growth of program
workers; and for parents, basic education and English for speakers of other
languages. Four case studies describing FLITE through the eyes of the
families illustrate the following: the program's benefits for children, the
value of its multiple points of entry, the uses to which participants put
literacy, and reciprocal learning relationships. The success of the program
is attributed to the following factors: employing women from the community as
family workers; extended opportunities for examining real-life issues and
questions; comprehensiveness and flexibility, reflecting the diversity of
participant aspirations; and the responsiveness and fluidity of staff
development. (Contains 22 references)
(KC)
********************************************************************************
Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made
from the original document.
********************************************************************************
O
(N)
Zr
tt
NOT
ONE-WAY STREET
A
1.4
THE POWER OF RECIPROCITY
IN FAMILY LITERACY PROGRAMS
KAREN GRISWOLD
CLAUDIA M. ULLMAN
PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND
OF EDUCATION
. DEPARTMENT
U.
DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL
of Educational Research and Improvement
Off i
INFORMATION
HAS BEEN GRANTED BY
ED CATIONAL RESOURCES
CENTER (ERIC)
This document has been reproduced as
received from the person or organization
originating it.
Minor changes have been made to
improve reproduction quality.
TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES
this
Points of view or opinions stated in
\
INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)
document do not necessarily represent
official OERI position or policy.
INSTITUTE FOR LITERACY STUDIES
LEHMAN COLLEGE, THE CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK
1333T COPY kYIE11,12112
2
31.momakumakmwqx.4
."88M888K88*8"18MIMMMEM
lams Vildra.TMERaaiM
NOT A ONE-WAY STREET
THE POWER OF RECIPROCITY
IN FAMILY LITERACY PROGRAMS
KAREN GRISWOLD
CLAUDIA M. ULLMAN
Institute for Literacy Studies
Lehman College
The City University of New York
Bronx, New York 10468
1997
3
:
8n'::::MMO,OMVS'A'P.MM."MM8M.W.,::::MKMBMB8MMEWKMM::"
MESSMONVIZOMMVSNAGIOUSOMINNIONASVMUMMINO:::,::.C.:::-:
CONTENTS
1
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
3
INTRODUCTION
3
BACKGROUND
6
FLITE AS A FAMILY LITERACY PROGRAM
11
THE FLITE PROGRAM STUCTURE
11
HOME VISITS
14
PARENTING WORKSHOPS
17
STAFF DEVELOPMENT
21
THE PRESCHOOL CLASSROOM
23
THE ADULT EDUCATION CLASSES
27
CASE STUDIES: FLITE THROUGH THE EYES OF THE FAMILIES
27
FOUR FLITE FAMILIES
27
Luz MARQUEZ
33
ZENA GARCIA
36
EVELYN LOPEZ
39
JUANA QUINTERO
4
EVOM;YM:023=M:=3=:,.%
43
DISCUSSION OF CASE STUDIES
43
THE BENEFITS TO CHILDREN
44
MULTIPLE POINTS OF ENTRY
45
THE RANGE OF LITERACY BEHAVIORS
46
RECIPROCAL LEARNING RELATIONSHIPS
47
THE FUTURE OF FAMILY LITERACY PROGRAMS
49
APPENDIX
53
BIBLIOGRAPHY
57
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
5
vra3NFERINMPISSSSSAMSNS
laMOSIREMEREP'" "
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This monograph is based on the work of the Family Literacy Involve-
ment Through Education (FLITE) program. Rina Shere, a consulting
documenter, helped us collect data for this monograph by spending many
hours talking with FLITE participants and staff. Her interviews provided
the basis for the case studies in this monograph. Since its inception,
FLITE staff members have included Daisy Aponte, Vanessa Cartagena,
Gladys Castro, Helen Crespo, Lucia De La Cruz, Azi Ellowitch, Pascal Foli,
Barbara Johnson, John Kowalski, Marilyn La Roche, Isabel Lobelo, Amy
March, Awilda Marquez, Fran Meyers, Norma Ortega, Claudette Thomas,
Maria Elsie Torres, Carmen Umpierre, Carmen Villa-Lugo, and Maria
Villanueva. They represent a range of practitioners committed to support-
ing families and learning, and their perspectives enriched our under-
standings.
The many parents and children of Community School District Seven
who participated in the FLITE program enabled us to learn from them
through their involvement in program activities and interviews.
Community School District Seven and the Institute for Literacy
Studies supported our work on this monograph. Amy March from
Community School District Seven and Marcie Wolfe and Betsey McGee
from the Institute provided valuable editing advice: Genevieve Vincent
prepared our manuscript for publication by using her desktop production
skills.
We are grateful for the contributions of all these people.
We are pleased that this publication was supported by a grant from
the federal FAMILY FIRST: Family-School Partnership Program. However,
the views expressed here are those of the authors and FLITE program
leaders, and not necessarily the views of the funder.
Karen Griswold, Adult and Youth Literacy Specialist,
Institute for Literacy Studies
Claudia M. Ullman, Director of Family Literacy Education.
Institute for Literacy Studies
6
I
,,,A1M80808
EDi*:a..z4,0.14,0:taaNIWIteailtacifIgerAMINVISSP
Vg`,x..fr
44440.%,,.:.:*::::nret.:::,
;or
INTRODUCTION
The words "family literacy" have become a familiar phrase in educa-
tional literature and political speeches. Policymakers, researchers, and
practitioners continue to call for more attention to the critical role of the
family in setting and supporting the course for their children's school
achievement and economic success. But what do family literacy programs
look like "on the ground?" How are they developed and implemented, and
what can they count as their achievements? Through the voices of both
participants and staff, this monograph tells the story of the Family
Literacy Involvement Through Education (FLITE) program, a family
literacy program located at Public School 40 in the Bronx, New York, from
its inception in January 1994 through July 1996. We begin with an
introduction to the FLITE program and an overview of some of the critical
issues in family literacy. Four case studies provide a closer look at
participants' experience in the FLITE program. We conclude with a
discussion of the case studies, focusing on some of the issues involved in
developing a successful family literacy program.
We hope that the FLITE story will be of interest to other practitioners
in the area of family literacy and contribute to the work of those who are
thinking of establishing such a program. We believe that the document
will also be of special interest to those concerned with forming policy in
the area.
BACKGROUND
The FLITE program is a partnership between Community School
District Seven and the Institute for Literacy Studies at Lehman College,
The City University of New York. FLITE brings together two federal funding
streams, FAMILY FIRST: Family-School Partnership Program and Even
Start, to provide adult literacy, parenting education, and early childhood
education in a family literacy context. The idea for initiating the program
in District Seven came from Dr. Fran Levy, then Director of Instruction
and Professional Development in the district. After many years of working
7
3
wsicimm-
.. ..
.
in schools, Fran Levy understood the importance of a family-based
program with a particular emphasis on early childhood education.
In the process of developing the original proposals for the FAMILY
FIRST: Family-School Partnership Program and Even Start, District
Seven contacted the Institute for Literacy Studies for help in thinking
about integrating adult literacy education and early childhood education.
The district was already familiar with the Institute's work because of its
involvement with the Elementary Teachers Network, an Institute project
that focuses on literacy education and assessment in the primary grades.
Like most programs. FLITE has grown and changed throughout the
several years of its existence. Staff currently describe seven program
goals:
1. To build participants' self-esteem by validating their languages,
cultures, capabilities, and identity as parents;
2. To provide participants with opportunities to understand and
develop a range of perspectives on child- and literacy-develop-
ment through interactions with others;
3. To assist participants in building community and forming net-
works;
4. To assist participants in becoming advocates for themselves and
their children;
5. To assist participants in identifying their own goals and in
developing plans to reach them;
6. To provide opportunities for participants to increase their skills in
reading and writing; and
7. To help participants confirm their roles as the primary educators
of their children and to provide opportunities for parents to learn
the skills that will help their children do better in school
These goals continue to evolve as the program develops and as the
needs of participants change.
The FLITE program currently includes several components directly
involving participants: home visits, pre-school classes, adult education
classes, and parenting workshops. The first year concentrated its pro-
gram activities entirely on home visits and parenting classes. While adult
education was a part of the home visit, no classes for adults were offered;
we added classes in Basic Education (BE) and English for Speakers of
8
xti**3.1.:m.m.m.,:::a:-..-nomm, 4 W..?M'aciWMaaiWK=2:0:64,Xed3MWM&V:iraK,,,,,M..1:=4*3=M4V..4.,Y=C:i:?.M.4**ficY4Z.X.0:54'4:::k.K:V.§..?"-:::':',.-::,,:;',;':-.
:$M.4z,{4
MSS," .firleSiilka..
Other Languages (ESOL) during year two because participants wanted to
broaden their own skills. We encouraged, although did not require,
participation in as many program components as interests and schedules
allowed.
When it began, the staff of the FLITE program consisted ofAmy March,
the program director, and Carmen Umpierre, the program coordinator.
Two family workers, Gladys Castro and Marilyn LaRoche, and a program
assistant, Vanessa Cartagena, were hired in May 1994. Three additional
family workers, Daisy Aponte, Norma Ortega, and Maria Villanueva were
hired in October 1994. In May 1995, Helen Crespo, a social worker, joined
the staff to facilitate the parent workshops. Awilda Marquez was hired as
a family worker in April 1996. During the three-year period described in
this monograph, some staff members left the FLITE program to pursue
other employment opportunities. Representing the Institute for Literacy
Studies, we both worked with the program from its inception by providing
staff and program development assistance and staffing and overseeing the
adult education components and the program evaluation.
Public School 40, where the FLITE program was based during its first
several years, is located in the Mott Haven area of the South Bronx, the
poorest congressional district in the nation. Half the population of this
district is unemployed and receives some form of government assistance.
All of the 22 schools in the district receive services under ESEA Chapter
One. Residents of the district tend to be young, with one out of every three
citizens under 18. In addition, people in the district are highly mobile; 31%
of the students do not remain in the same school for a full year. At any
given time, approximately 200 families live in temporary housing located
in the district and operated by the New York City Department of Homeless
Services and private, non -profit organizations.
FLITE participants came from the Mott Haven community; they were
predominantly Latina and African-American women, and initially were
recruited door-to-door by the program's family workers. In order to be
eligible to participate in the program, and according to the requirements
of the federal grants, participants must have had a child under the age of
eight.
The statistics we note here paint a picture of this community only in
the broadest strokes. They don't portray the day-to-day experiences of
individuals, such as FLITE participants, who strive for the best for their
O
K:?&?:::MiSMOMMMX::4 5 vemmassossimans
children and themselves, and approach learning with energy and enthu-
siasm despite often difficult life situations.
FLITE AS A FAMILY LITERACY PROGRAM
FLITE defines itself as a family literacy program. There is no univer-
sally accepted definition of family literacy, but the Family Literacy
Commission of the International Reading Association describes it in this
way:
Family literacy encompasses the ways parents, children, and
extended family members use literacy at home and in their
community. Sometimes, family literacy occurs naturally dur-
ing the routines of daily living and helps adults and children
"get things done." These events might include using drawings
or writings to share ideas; composing notes or letters to
communicate messages; making lists; reading and following
directions; or sharing stories and ideas through conversation,
reading and writing. Family literacy may be initiated purpose-
fully by a parent or may occur spontaneously as parents and
children go about the business of their daily lives. Family
literacy activities may also reflect the ethnic, racial, or cul-
tural heritage of the families involved. (Morrow, Paratore, and
Tracey, 1994)
Although few would doubt the family's critical role in education, the
concept and funding of programs that are considered to be "family
literacy" is relatively recent. Only over the past ten years have policymakers
and funders expressed substantial interest in the area. (Auerbach, 1995)
Nevertheless, the assumptions upon which many family literacy
pro-
grams are based and the ways in which programs are implemented have
been the subject of considerable debate in the field.
Family literacy programs can provide powerful opportunities for
learning on the part of children and parents, but they need to be
conscious
in both their design and in the language their practitioners
use to describe
them. As both Auerbach and Fingeret have pointed out, family literacy
programs can easily embody assumptions about teaching and learning
that constitute what is frequently called the "deficit model," in which
program participants are viewed as having some weakness or other
liability that needs to be addressed. As Fingeret states: